A DETECTIVE'S ANALYSIS

The theory that a planet once existed in the present asteroid belt, sometimes
called the disruption theory, addresses certain peculiarities inherent in
the planetoids themselves and their realm as well as some important external
presuppositions as they bear on astronomy as a science. With the fact of
the planetesimal filled anomalous gap between Mars and Jupiter already established
as evidence for the existence of a former planet in that realm we take the
grounds for this consensus in order as follows:

a. The planetoids are much smaller than any of the other primary planets.

b. They are irregular-shaped, fragment-like bodies.

c. The bulk of them are at the same distance from the Sun.

d. The orbits of the planetoids are distributed throughout the entire
volume of space at their distance from the Sun being stable against planetary
perturbations, and evidence themselves as being remnants of a much larger
original population from which the escaping and unstable orbits have been
eliminated.

e. Their periodic revolutions are accomplished in a reasonably similar
time.

f. The orbits of the planetoids are "ultra-zodiacal," in other
words they exhibit a departure from the plane of the ecliptic to a degree
not matched by any of the major solar system bodies, save possibly Pluto,
which itself might possibly represent a pair of surviving satellites of
Neptune or an extinct planet beyond. The indication is that an applied
force has thrown many of the planetoids out of the plane of the original
orbit of their singular parent body.

g. The orbits of many planetoids are more eccentric than those of the
other primaries,

h. The orbits of many of the planetoids cross each other which, save
for some of the comets, is a perfect anomaly in the solar system.

i. The asteroids exhibit "explosion signatures" in the distribution
of and relationship between their orbital elements, an effect first discovered
to hold among fragments of artificial satellites circling the earth which
exploded in orbit. j. There are still some 1000 or so planetoids larger
than one-half mile in diameter moving in Earth-crossing orbits despite
the fact of the inevitable elimination of such objects by the Earth through
collisions given enough time. Such a circumstance would indicate a recent
source or the necessity of a continuous production of these objects, the
latter being untenable.

k. The mere presence of zodiacal dust in the solar system today is indicative
of a recent major dust producing event which poured enormous amounts of
material into the same regions.

l. The extremely elongated orbits of comets which themselves are volatile
planetoids visible from Earth as the "great comets" is indicative
of fragments raining back for the first time onto the site of the breakup.
They are kept in deep freeze for most of their orbits thus conserving their
volatiles.

Realistically it can be interpreted that "long period" comets,
those with slightly open or "hyperbolic" orbits, in reality never
quite escaped the gravitational field of the Sun while the "short period"
comets, typified by Halley's comet, were fixed in more of an interplanetary
periodicity. Many of the short period comets approach the Sun often enough
to "burn off" their frozen gas or ice, ultimately reducing them
to meteoroid streams of which many exist in the vicinity of the inner solar
system. Some of these often intercept the Earth. The exploded planet theory
is the only dynamically viable alternative to the "Oort" cloud,
the latter requiring the existence of an implausible realm of comets orbiting
the Sun at unimaginable distances. Only a recent catastrophic origin for
comets systematically explains their present existence. m. The composition
of much of the asteroidal debris between Mars and Jupiter is now known to
be heavy dense metallic material indicating an origin within a parent body
of considerable size. Many other exhibits, such as these, in the cosmos
and in the solar system clearly indicate a recent planetary catastrophe
within our midst. The total estimated united mass of the asteroids presently
known to exist is rather small, being equivalent to only about one tenth
the mass of the Moon, which would be understandable in terms of an explosion.

The orbits of two well known short period comets are shown in this exhibit;
Famous Halley's which returns every 76 years, and Encke which has the shortest
known period of any comet at three and a half years. The open ended orbit
of the great comet of 1811 which has been seen only once is also shown.
The approximate orbits of several asteroids with cornet like orbits are
also shown as well.

Given its prominence in current theories, the causality of Jupiter as
an explanation for the asteroid belt is an issue that deserves to be addressed
by itself. The premise, which is quite popular among scientists today, is
that the asteroids represent the residue of a planet that never formed because
of the powerful gravitational interference of massive Jupiter just beyond
the asteroid belt which prevented the planet from forming. In reality, Jupiter
is not really "just beyond," but far beyond the asteroid belt.
A circle with a diameter twice the Earth-Sun distance could fit between
the asteroids and Jupiter with a generous portion of space to spare on either
side. Thus the distance is so great that the asteroids are actually considerably
closer to Earth than they are to Jupiter. Secondly, the bulk of the asteroids
circulate in relatively stable orbits at around 2.8 A.U. from the Sun, not
showing any significant perturbations induced by the giant planet after
all. (A.U. = astronomical unit, which is the average distance between the
Earth and Sun, or 93,000,000 miles) To bring the matter closer to home,
there would seem to be a far greater potential for a gravitational affect
on Venus by the Earth than by Jupiter on the asteroids, yet the orbit of
Venus is one of the most stable and perfectly symmetrical of any planetary
circulation in the solar system. In fact the planet itself is found within
a relatively crowded sector of the solar system where the potential for
orbital perturbations would seem to be significantly greater than anywhere
else. According to the "laws" of Isaac Newton (1643-1727) gravity
functions along an inverse square law principle.

Although a very large planet, Jupiter is not the likely cause of a planetary
malformation or disruption. Jupiter's gravity is known to be something less
than three times that of Earth, yet the distance between Jupiter and the
asteroid belt is nearly ten times the distance between Venus and Earth.
Insofar as pulling in comets from a supposed Oort cloud oreffecting
the zone where the asteroids now exist, calculations show that Jupiter never
"profoundly influenced" the belt in any manner and is incapable
of the celestial gyrations that are often assigned to it in order to make
the hypothesis work. Even if the original planet was gradually pulled close
to Jupiter and torn apart by the latter this would still not explain the
stable circular orbit of the strewn bits and pieces still neatly located
at the asteroid belt, again, a fact that stands out against the argument
that the incident could have occurred near Jupiter. The association of Jupiter
in any event is very tenuous at best. As for the nebular hypothesis it turns
out to be not only poor science but poor deduction, not to mention poor
theology, as we will see. The continued success of the nebular theory is
bound up in nothing less than a long term historic bias in the scientific(?)
establishment. The accretion concept of solar system formation is not only
wholly out of step with the Biblical concept of creation, but mutually exclusive
with it. The profound spacing of the planets can only be seen in context
of Divine design. As well, the subsequent destruction of one planetary member
can be viewed as an inevitable consequence of the entrance of ethical I
discord, with physical results, into a once perfect universe.

Since his debut in Eden man has been called to subdue the world, not
abuse it, carefully tending to it in terms of God's word as His vice regent.
Science or knowledge, gained by thinking God's thoughts after Him, was the
means by which man was to transform a wilderness into a vibrant inhabited
world. This process was to involve an intimate knowledge of the nature,
character, and attributes of God Himself. With man in intimate fellowship
with God in the beginning this was no problem until his fall. The serpent
in the garden was, of course, functioning under a different agenda, an agenda
which had devastating historical consequences. It is these qualities of
God that vitally come into play when regenerate man studies the sciences
in general, and astronomy in particular. During the wilderness wanderings
of the Israelites, recorded in the book of Exodus, God imparted a special
administration of His spirit upon the workmen of the tabernacle. These were
craftsmen, artificers, and other construction workers who received a special
measure of ability, intelligence, and knowledge, from the Spirit of God,
in order to finish an important building project. (Exodus 31:1-7) Likewise
the Biblical Christian who possesses a permanent continual inner presence
of God's life giving spirit has a special dispensation of divine ennoblement
and wisdom (James 1:5) to extend God's kingdom on Earth through his or her
own particular calling. This is no less true with the God revering astronomer
who explores and diagnoses the physical heavens in terms of Divine revelation.
This is what God first called Adam to do at Eden in the beginning and this
is the quality that breaks the stalemate in fallen man's double minded gropings
for knowledge, of which the battle between the adherents of special creation
and evolution is but one example.

A catastrophic hypothesis has a profound affinity to the special creation
account which in turn is integrally related to the Biblical ethic. It follows
that the ultimate outcome of a catastrophic thesis is a personal realization
of the Almighty. In other words the inevitable conclusion that oneself is
indeed a creature of God is to recognize his own accountability. The latter
is totally unacceptable to the infidel who today suppresses true science
at an unprecedented degree by supplanting it with his own vain philosophy.
The astronomer who gazes at the beauty, wonder, and majesty of what he sees
in the heaven and who dares admit a possible divine origin of the cosmos
is immediately confronted in his own personal conscience and must wrestle
with the patient ethical issue for as long as he lives, or unless he finds
himself able, by God's grace, to repent and believe thereby finding rest
unto his soul as he turns his life over to the calling of Christ. It is
only then that the door is open to a life giving rebirth in his own life,
and a whole new dimension added in his world and life view, and his labors.
The secular world at large wants nothing of this. The scientific, educational,
and media establishments all have made this fact abundantly clear by their
decidedly anti-Christian posture. Yet this is the eternal message of astronomy.

We must look at the Earth, the asteroids, and the stars in the overall
context of a cosmos which has been tainted by the entrance of iniquity since
the time of creation. The word cosmos comes from the Greek kosmos
which refers to the orderly arrangement of the whole of creation and its
inhabitant host of which all exist under the personal superintendence, provision,
and care of the Almighty. He alone, and in His own time, is able to intercede
in judgment as well as in the restoration of that order. The word astronomy
itself comes from two Greek words joined together which means "star
law," or the law of the stars. The word science means "knowledge"
and therefore includes only that which we actually know, by direct observation
and experience. Science is the organized body of factual knowledge and relationships.
Beyond that we should not limit our source of knowledge to reason or logic
alone, but extend our sources of information to include Divine revelation.
It is in the process of true science and in the context of Divine revelation
that we ought to look at the minor planets and their circumstances, history,
and destiny. It is man's prerogative to bring all this knowledge together
in his own collective superintendence as God's vice regents upon the Earth.

It had been argued by Galileo several centuries ago that the Sun was
the center of the universe not the Earth. In spite of the lack of evidence
to support the heliocentric system the humanists adopted it and heralded
the death of the Bible as the word of God and, as a result, the death of
Christianity as a reasonable faith. Contributing to the defeat of the Bible
as the authority in nature were many names which have since become famous.
Among the most notable are Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. The latter had
said "the Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."
This is the kind of thinking that has left modern science ethically, methodically,
and systematically destitute. The Copernican Revolution, as this change
of view is called, was not just a revolution in astronomy, but it also spread
into politics and theology. It ultimately lead to the rise of uniformitarianism
in geology, evolution in biology, and relativity in philosophy, physics,
and mathematics. All of this is the background of what is served up for
public consumption by the scientific and educational establishments and
the controlled media today. The stage was set for the age of Bible criticism.
Thus the Bible is no longer widely accepted as the framework for a vital
world and life view.

Nevertheless, the argument that "the Bible is not a textbook of
science" is a fallacy of false observation. The implication is that
the Bible contains scientific errors. Obviously the Bible is not a textbook
on quantum mechanics or biochemistry. It is obvious too that the Bible is
not a scientific textbook in the sense of giving detailed technical descriptions
and mathematical formulations of natural phenomena. But this is not an adequate
reason for questioning the objective accuracy of the numerous portions of
Scripture which do deal with natural phenomena and historic events. Even
though the Bible is not a textbook on mathematics per se, we can, although,
for instance, expect that Daniel understands sixty-nine weeks by the phrase,
"seven weeks and sixty-two weeks" (Daniel 9:25).The Bible
is not, strictly speaking, a historical textbook either, but we expect that
when it alludes to things which can be historically verified, it should
be accurate. Likewise, the Bible is not technically a textbook of modern
science, but when it refers to things which can be measured or checked by
modern science, it should be accurate. The Bible is the inerrant, authoritative
Word of God Himself; therefore it can be depended upon to provide thestarting presuppositions for the scientist to perform his work investigating
the ancient Earth and the physical heaven. The Bible with its perfect claim
to authority based on the authority of Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:17-18; John
10:34-35) clearly establishes a framework of interpretation within which
men are expected to formulate their understanding of the data of science.
It is most reasonable and gracious of God to do so, since it would be impossible
for man by the study of present processes to know anything for certain either
about the ancient past, or the distant future, for that matter. Only God
can know these things for He alone was a witness present at the beginning.
We are able to know the truth about these matters only through faith in
God's statements concerning them. Therefore, the believing Christian who
has come to know God finds that He is indeed trustworthy. Just as faith
in a reliable human friend comes from getting to know him, or her, faith
in God comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. Thus "faith"
is not just positive thinking or speculativeoptimism, it is a vital
substance of a personal relationship between the creature and his Creator.
Therefore, the believing Christian goes to the Bible, God's Word, for his
basic orientation in all departments of truth. The Bible, in that context,
is indeed a textbook for science as well as the guide to spiritual truth.
In the course of things, when the Bible does touch upon matters of physical
processes it can be counted upon as being reliable as an important source
of data for the scientist. The tragedy of the scientific revolution, so
called, is that through its fallacious reasoning we consequently live in
a decidedly post Christian, hence non-Christian, world. This is why most
scientists, like bad marksmen, keep missing the "target," that
distinction between falsehood and ultimate truth. Thus, they continue to
grope among themselves, as the blind leading the blind.

This engraving which appeared in a prestigious London journal
in 1814 illustrates a well authenticated discovery widely reported in the
scientific journals of the early nineteenth century.

The fossil, discovered in 1812 on the coast of the French Caribbean island
of Guadaloupe, consists of a skeleton, fully human in every respect and
complete except for the feet and head. It was identified as that of a healthy
woman about five feet two inches tall. Although many of the bones were somewhat
twisted and the joints dislocated, the skeleton was fully articulate - every
bone in its proper position. The limestone in which the skeleton was embedded
was extremely hard and part of a formation, according to modern day geology,
dated at 28 million years old.

The vitally important feature of this fossil, that it is obviously human,
is undoubtedly the reason why it is not presently on display at the museum
or even mentioned in textbooks today. This fossil of a perfectly modern
human being presents a very difficult problem for evolutionary theorists
to explain because, in their context, it places man 25 million years earlier
than he was supposed to have evolved from a monkey like creature. Not only
that, but according to Charles Darwin, man originated from old world, not
new world, monkeys. Modern looking man was not supposed to have migrated
to the Americas until some 20,000 years ago. Hence this specimen has been
explained away as an "intrusive burial."

The fossil lady has spent much time collecting dust in the basement of
the British Museum, in seclusion with the fraudulent Piltdown fossils, as
relics of embarrassment to conventional dogma. When this two ton limestone
block was originally placed on display it was regarded as evidence of the
great Genesis Flood and a reminder of past divine judgment on Earth. In
that day when men still had freedom to publish their discoveries, Lyell
and Darwin with their demand for millions of years were yet decades in the
future. A "rediscovery" of the Lady from Guadaloupe has
been made late in our own century by a breed of archaeologists untrammeled
by "formal" teachings, who recently had opportunity to reexamine
the slab.